ArticlePublic health nutrition2018
Sodium and potassium content of 24 h urinary collections: a comparison between field- and laboratory-based analysers.
Article in Public health nutrition, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of a Sodium-Reduction Smartphone App and Reduced-Sodium Salt to Lower Sodium Intake in Adults With Hypertension: Findings From the Salt Alternatives Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2023Trial
- Article
- Rationale, design, and baseline characteristics of the Salt Substitute in India Study (SSiIS): The protocol for a double-blinded, randomized-controlled trial.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 7 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveMeasurement of mean population Na and K intakes typically uses laboratory-based assays, which can add significant logistical burden and costs. A valid field-based measurement method would be a significant advance. In the current study, we used 24 h urine samples to compare estimates of Na, K and Na:K ratio based upon assays done using the field-based Horiba twin meter v. laboratory-based methods.
designThe performance of the Horiba twin meter was determined by comparing field-based estimates of mean Na and K against those obtained using laboratory-based methods. The reported 95 % limits of agreement of Bland-Altman plots were calculated based on a regression approach for non-uniform differences.
settingThe 24 h urine samples were collected as part of an ongoing study being done in rural China. SUBJECTS: One hundred and sixty-six complete 24 h urine samples were qualified for estimating 24 h urinary Na and K excretion.
resultsMean Na and K excretion were estimated as 170·4 and 37·4 mmol/d, respectively, using the meter-based assays; and 193·4 and 43·8 mmol/d, respectively, using the laboratory-based assays. There was excellent relative reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient) for both Na (0·986) and K (0·986). Bland-Altman plots showed moderate-to-good agreement between the two methods.
conclusionsNa and K intake estimations were moderately underestimated using assays based upon the Horiba twin meter. Compared with standard laboratory-based methods, the portable device was more practical and convenient.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.